Unpopular opinions

[ScraftyIsTheBest]

Welcome to the world of Internet fandom, where the term "nuance" cannot be comprehended by people during online discussions on the likes of Reddit, Twitter, and especially 4chan.

You either think something is the best thing in the world and masterpiece, or it's a piece of utter shit. No in-between opinions. I have plenty of things to say about SV even if I personally consider it one of my favorite Pokemon games to date, even though my stance on the matter is that while it clearly isn't polished and the technical flaws are apparent, it has a lot of good in it and a lot of great things went into the game to make for a great game nonetheless and one that feels like a true step closer towards what a console-scale mainline Pokemon game should be. It's a damn fun game and I enjoyed my time with it so much.

Yet many fans do not know the difference between criticism and relentless complaining, and many also do not understand the idea that you can like something and still be critical of something at the same time. People who still buy and play certain games are not all blind yes-men who agree with everything, contrary to what your average terminally online person may believe, and people who criticize games or talk about their flaws are not all haters, also contrary to what your average terminally online person may believe.

SV has had many criticisms leveraged against it, and there is plenty to be critical of, but there's also tons of great things in my book that can be said about it that are worthy of praise, which I won't go too in depth about in this post, and those things are worth praising as things that would be great to expand upon and improve in future mainline entries: there's clearly many steps forward that can be taken even further. There's definitely ambition behind them, and a will to do great things shown in it, despite the technical issues and evident signs that it had to be pushed out to meet a deadline, which is of course worth being critical of at the same time.

Lo and behold, having a complicated/nuanced stance on something is very much possible!

 

[Jungle cruiser]

Eh, personally I always try to focus on the things I like about the game instead of lingering on the dislikes for too long.

Like, sure, the frame drops can actually get annoying sometimes, wild pokemon's encounter triggers are a little weird sometimes and the textures in general would be sorta off. However, there's a ton of aspects of the game I unironically adored!

The open world, while a bit confusing at times, rly felt engaging and always left me wanting to explore. The tracks were legit fire (and the rearrangements of each area's theme for wild mon battles was something I didn't know I needed till now). The new mons were all pretty solid overall, some took a little to grow on me like brambleghast rabsca and scovillain, tho the small amount of regional forms was a little disappointing.

Sooooo yeah idk. I unironically enjoyed myself! They're not perfection ofc, but as I said earlier, I mostly skimp over them to focus on the good stuff. Feel free to disagree tho! (Respectfully ofc, I don't wanna be harassed for this...)

 

[Cancel cult]

Income from the anime, card game, and merch does not stop completely over a longer development cycle. The revenue from merch sales far outweighs the revenue from game sales, even if it might slow down a bit.


The Pokemon games alone (not counting merch sales and other product, which make far more money) sell well enough that they could easily make enough money to pay programmers and artists over a longer development cycle and still remain profitable. It is not a choice between making an worse game versus financial insolvency, it is a choice between making a massive profit versus making an even more massive profit (very little of which, I might add, ends up in the hands of the people who did the work). Obviously, executives will basically always choose the latter, but that doesn't mean that they didn't have a choice and that doesn't mean you can't criticize them for making that choice.


This is a thought-terminating cliche. (Almost) every video game (movie, TV show, comic book, etc) is the product of hundreds of hours of work by dozens or hundreds of people. Does that mean that it is an "insult" to point out that you view any media product to technically flawed, lacking in artistry, or simply bad?

ok, but seriously though, you are asking a company to make decisions that arent in the companies best interest? a company that is owned by nintendo, who, as shown before, will do anything for money, including forcing a man into a life of servitude. if satoshi tajiri dosent comply, he can kiss his job goodbye. and by the way, you really shouldnt complain about a game that is still geting updated being buggy.

 

[Hugin]

ok, but seriously though, you are asking a company to make decisions that arent in the companies best interest? a company that is owned by nintendo, who, as shown before, will do anything for money, including forcing a man into a life of servitude. if satoshi tajiri dosent comply, he can kiss his job goodbye. and by the way, you really shouldnt complain about a game that is still geting updated being buggy.

Yes, yes, capitalism is an unrelenting hellscape that destroys art, we're aware. Doesn't mean we stop complaining about it.

 

[Just A Seaking]

ok, but seriously though, you are asking a company to make decisions that arent in the companies best interest? a company that is owned by nintendo, who, as shown before, will do anything for money, including forcing a man into a life of servitude.

I'm fascinated that someone can look at something so deeply and profoundly vindictive, brutal and evil (even if Gary Bowser did act maliciously, the penalty vastly outweighs the crime) and come away with the conclusion not that Nintendo and all other big companies are tyrannic hegemonies that need to be kept in check, but that it's fine, actually! We should all just be grateful that we can play the video game, and that GF and TPC actually compensate their employees for their labor!

...So, uh, Pokemon, huh? Let's change the subject a bit. I don't think it's at all fair to classify Mega Evolution as a gimmick in the same way that Z-Moves, Dyanamax, and Terastal are, because Mega Evolution is unique on a 'mon-by-'mon basis and fundamentally changes the way they play. There were unique Z-Moves and Gigantamaxes, but aside from a solitary gimmick they usually didn't change the way a Pokemon could play in the same way that Megas could. The other gimmicks all share general universality, and for that reason they fall flat in my eyes since they tend to blend together (and also, makes predictions a giant nightmare, if you've ever played gen 9, 7, or the very early pre-dynamax ban days of gen 8). Aesthetically speaking, I find Mega Evolutions much more pleasing just because they bring something definitively new to a specific species, and in terms of competitive play I find them much more naturally telegraphed than the other gimmicks.

In particular, I disagree with the notion that Mega Evolution is somehow particularly associated with Kalos. For better or worse, the other gimmicks are deeply linked with the lore of their home region - Z-Moves are borne of lingering otherwordly energy from Ultra Wormholes, Dynamax is a result of special particles from Eternatus congregating in Power Spots after the Darkest Day, Terastal... will likely be expanded on in DLC but seems to result from something in Area Zero, you get the gist. By contrast, Mega Evolution is a phenomenon that canonically originated in two seperate instances - in Hoenn, and Kalos - and both cases are a little less specific than the other gimmicks (Sycamore guesses Mega Stones came from fallout from the Ultimate Weapon, and the Draconids believe Mega Evolution is a gift from Rayquaza).

 

[pika pal]

ok, but seriously though, you are asking a company to make decisions that arent in the companies best interest? a company that is owned by nintendo, who, as shown before, will do anything for money, including forcing a man into a life of servitude. if satoshi tajiri dosent comply, he can kiss his job goodbye. and by the way, you really shouldnt complain about a game that is still geting updated being buggy.

The condescending implication of that image will definitely help your case in the discussion.

The man was having wages garnished while he was in prison and making pennies at best. The salary cut Nintendo takes is clearly more about intimidating pirates than the actual revenue for them, so I wouldn't consider it apt to this particular topic.

As for recommending TPC/Nintendo do this, yes it would cost them some amount of money, but the opposite consideration is the brand image and protection from releasing more technically stable products over a more prolonged time period. Pokemon is a massive outlier in terms of tech quality among games associated with Nintendo as a Publisher, bordering on a laughing stock in less generous circles, not to mention the series' rapid release pace runs a very real risk of fatigue, as one could argue was the case with annual releases for franchises like Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed, or even a factor in the end of "Poke-mania" in the transition from Gen 2 to 3.

The monetary expense is not the only factor that goes into decisions about the Development cycle, and we can very much complain to TPC for keeping a crunched schedule even if it's not the fault of Gamefreak as the developing team. Additionally I fail to see why we can't complain about a game being buggy because they are releasing updates for it. Several Triple A releases get lambasted for problems on release that are supposed to be fixed via updates, why is Pokemon the exception? This is especially the case when the patches have been fixing game breaking interactions that emerge from incompetent design (such as the Bad Eggs and Paradox raid crashes) while the source of several complaints (that being the poor technical performance) has not been "fixed" by the patches in a significant capacity nor shown any roadmap of such (if it can be fixed at all post-release).

I get having an unpopular opinion as per the thread, but the statements made to argue against the dissent towards said opinion come across as either one sided or incredibly irrational/illogical in places.

...So, uh, Pokemon, huh? Let's change the subject a bit. I don't think it's at all fair to classify Mega Evolution as a gimmick in the same way that Z-Moves, Dyanamax, and Terastal are, because Mega Evolution is unique on a 'mon-by-'mon basis and fundamentally changes the way they play. There were unique Z-Moves and Gigantamaxes, but aside from a solitary gimmick they usually didn't change the way a Pokemon could play in the same way that Megas could. The other gimmicks all share general universality, and for that reason they fall flat in my eyes since they tend to blend together (and also, makes predictions a giant nightmare, if you've ever played gen 9, 7, or the very early pre-dynamax ban days of gen 8). Aesthetically speaking, I find Mega Evolutions much more pleasing just because they bring something definitively new to a specific species, and in terms of competitive play I find them much more naturally telegraphed than the other gimmicks.

In particular, I disagree with the notion that Mega Evolution is somehow particularly associated with Kalos. For better or worse, the other gimmicks are deeply linked with the lore of their home region - Z-Moves are borne of lingering otherwordly energy from Ultra Wormholes, Dynamax is a result of special particles from Eternatus congregating in Power Spots after the Darkest Day, Terastal... will likely be expanded on in DLC but seems to result from something in Area Zero, you get the gist. By contrast, Mega Evolution is a phenomenon that canonically originated in two seperate instances - in Hoenn, and Kalos - and both cases are a little less specific than the other gimmicks (Sycamore guesses Mega Stones came from fallout from the Ultimate Weapon, and the Draconids believe Mega Evolution is a gift from Rayquaza).

Said most of what I have, and the other thing that annoys me about Mega Portability is that it's basically designed to be expanded Gen to Gen, with like 10 or so new Megas for Pokemon each go, rather than being thrown out with the "everyone can use it" gimmicks that clearly were not designed with any actual Pokemon in mind and resulting in inevitable "win more rich get richer" situations.

 

[Celever]

To be fair (wow am I really about to say this) it's difficult to argue that capitalism is ruining video games, when video games are a capitalist invention first and foremost. Video games came from and are a part of the toy market, and have always been predicated on making profit. The only games that aren't based around making profit are those already made by the ultra-rich who can fulfil their artistic fantasies with no care for financial loss... and well, that is still also capitalist and still a huge problem.

This doesn't mean we shouldn't be critical of the role that capitalist mentality plays in the video game industry, because sure it could break away from it at some point, but attempts to do so have largely been failures (i.e. crowdfunded projects) because making anything more than a sprite-based and fairly simple usually platformer off crowdfunding is pretty much impossible. Add 3D models and animation into the picture and the price of production increases a lot, which considering expansive / particularly beautiful 2D games are more time-consuming to create always nerfs the viability of the project that only a few outliers have managed to overcome. You're stuck with quirky, exceptional, or bust.

The 3-year project cycle isn't that deep to me anymore. The issue is fans are desiring Pokémon to be a crazy ToTK-style game when I don't see any reason why that should be the case. I mean, Pokémon has never been a ToTK-style game before. Pokémon lands on the quirky side of gaming that shores up its lack of polish with charm, and that has been the case for its entire lifetime. No Pokémon game has ever tried to win Game of the Year.

This isn't bootlicking "why are you trying to expect the games to be good just be happy with what you get", it's more like the expectations and demands have to match the product more. There are expectations and demands that are absolutely reasonable yet constantly ignored -- battle frontier, difficulty settings, touch-ups to older Pokémon to defend them against obsoletion through power creep -- and there are expectations and demands that have been echo chambered into being widespread for no real reason -- voice acting, incredible graphics, perfectly fast-based gamespeed. In Game Dev Tycoon these are very different sliders and every addition in a technical sense has opportunity cost elsewhere.

Yes, because capitalism forces everything to be opportunity cost instead of permitting as good as possible. You can argue with that in a societal sense by joining the revolution, but applying the problems of capitalism to Pokémon isn't really fair because it's just working in the system it's stuck in. It's like having a hatred for social services instead of the Government that inadequately funds them, it really misses the point.

 

[Worldie]

I wanted to also echo on Celever about one part: graphics.
It's a point I've seen raised by a few other people / big youtubers that approach this kind of problematic. A lot of recent releases have been putting extreme amount of their allocated efforts in "making the game look realistic" (or flashy), with the result that the devs spent so much time in trying to make the game look in a certain way, that the game ended up lacking in everything else.

It's a weird fixation of a big chunk of modern playerbase that "if a game doesn't have hyperrealistic graphic it's bad". Regardless of the proof that a game doesn't *need* 3d HD 4k graphics to be a good game, it's starting to really hurt the industry as a whole. Moreso when the company that is developing the game isn't exactly good at making that kind of graphic in first place.

In the case of Pokemon, for example, they've tried really hard to get the 3d graphic and openworld to work for SV... and kinda succeeded in making it "look good" after the uuuh... "SwSh tree". Plenty of the areas of the open world look amazing, the cities are gorgeous, combat animations are much more refined... But at what cost? The massive FPS issues that SV got, as well as the developing disaster that is the spawn system causing RAM bloating.

I'd say one thing that both the playerbase and the publishers (because we know that the publishers will demand what the user base yells for) is stopping demanding for every game to be super hyper 3d hd vr 4k bla bla bla <insert acronyms>.
It's not needed. It never was. Some of the best games on the market aren't even 3d at all.

 

[Nokocchi]

a company that is owned by nintendo, who, as shown before, will do anything for money,

I should correct you here and mention that Game Freak does not actually belong to Nintendo. Nintendo got 1/3rd the ownership rights to the Pokemon franchise in return for helping Game Freak get Red and Green get out of their 6 year development hell, but they do not own Game Freak itself.

In fact, not only was their first non-Pokemon title made after Red and Green a Playstation exclusive(Click Medic), they also released the game Tembo the Badass Elephant for Steam, PS4, and Xbox One, while skipping the Wii U entirely. Due to Pokemon partially belonging to Nintendo they have to be exclusive to their consoles, but any non-Pokemon games they make can be made for whatever systems they want.

 

[Cancel cult]

I'm fascinated that someone can look at something so deeply and profoundly vindictive, brutal and evil (even if Gary Bowser did act maliciously, the penalty vastly outweighs the crime) and come away with the conclusion not that Nintendo and all other big companies are tyrannic hegemonies that need to be kept in check, but that it's fine, actually! We should all just be grateful that we can play the video game, and that GF and TPC actually compensate their employees for their labor!

...So, uh, Pokemon, huh? Let's change the subject a bit. I don't think it's at all fair to classify Mega Evolution as a gimmick in the same way that Z-Moves, Dyanamax, and Terastal are, because Mega Evolution is unique on a 'mon-by-'mon basis and fundamentally changes the way they play. There were unique Z-Moves and Gigantamaxes, but aside from a solitary gimmick they usually didn't change the way a Pokemon could play in the same way that Megas could. The other gimmicks all share general universality, and for that reason they fall flat in my eyes since they tend to blend together (and also, makes predictions a giant nightmare, if you've ever played gen 9, 7, or the very early pre-dynamax ban days of gen 8). Aesthetically speaking, I find Mega Evolutions much more pleasing just because they bring something definitively new to a specific species, and in terms of competitive play I find them much more naturally telegraphed than the other gimmicks.

In particular, I disagree with the notion that Mega Evolution is somehow particularly associated with Kalos. For better or worse, the other gimmicks are deeply linked with the lore of their home region - Z-Moves are borne of lingering otherwordly energy from Ultra Wormholes, Dynamax is a result of special particles from Eternatus congregating in Power Spots after the Darkest Day, Terastal... will likely be expanded on in DLC but seems to result from something in Area Zero, you get the gist. By contrast, Mega Evolution is a phenomenon that canonically originated in two seperate instances - in Hoenn, and Kalos - and both cases are a little less specific than the other gimmicks (Sycamore guesses Mega Stones came from fallout from the Ultimate Weapon, and the Draconids believe Mega Evolution is a gift from Rayquaza).

that wasnt the conclusion i came to. what nintendo did was bad. keyword: nintendo. as long as gamefreak is owned by nintendo, they have to make the best decisions for the company, which means that they have to make decisions that you may not like.

 

[Eriorguez]

Midday got its own attack in the shape of a Rock-type Quick Attack, so Midnight ought to get something that wasn't COUNTER as a counterpart. Ergo, a Rock-type Revenge/Avalanche would be on point. As for Dusk, its stats were Midday but with 2 less speed and 2 more attack, rather than, well, being an in-between the other forms. Also, Thrash was also a meh thing to have versus Accelerock, so, Rock-type Thrash would be on point anyway.

I just dislike the concept of regional-only evolutions. Base Farfetch'd and Corsola could have worked with direct evolutions, Qwilfish did not need to have a recolor of a regional form, Sneasel could had worked fine with a split evolution... Also, Kleavor as an in-between Scyther and Scizor would IMO have worked the best. Rock armor and weaponry aren't as good as Steel ones, but also don't weight it down as much.

 

[Rapti]

that wasnt the conclusion i came to. what nintendo did was bad. keyword: nintendo. as long as gamefreak is owned by nintendo, they have to make the best decisions for the company, which means that they have to make decisions that you may not like.

Gamefreak's not owned by Nintendo; Pokemon and the Pokemon Company are co-owned by Gamefreak, Nintendo and Creatures Inc. (formerly Ape Inc. a.k.a. the Earthbound guys)
these 3 companies are independent from each other

and yes bad decisions can absolutely destroy a brand no matter how big just go ask the Looney Tunes, no excuses about "but it makez moneyz nowz" for Pokemon there, you can kill your golden goose


also, are you guys really Ok with the human's designs in S&V? cause the eyes are just so damn ugly to me

 

[Coronis]

Gamefreak's not owned by Nintendo; Pokemon and the Pokemon Company are co-owned by Gamefreak, Nintendo and Creatures Inc. (formerly Ape Inc. a.k.a. the Earthbound guys)
these 3 companies are independent from each other

and yes bad decisions can absolutely destroy a brand no matter how big just go ask the Looney Tunes, no excuses about "but it makez moneyz nowz" for Pokemon there, you can kill your golden goose


also, are you guys really Ok with the human's designs in S&V? cause the eyes are just so damn ugly to me

My eyes are so damn ugly to me.

 

[khlaylav]

I think the execution stinks, but I like the concept Let's Go had of setting requirements before going into the gym.

 

[Pikachu315111]

Midday got its own attack in the shape of a Rock-type Quick Attack, so Midnight ought to get something that wasn't COUNTER as a counterpart. Ergo, a Rock-type Revenge/Avalanche would be on point. As for Dusk, its stats were Midday but with 2 less speed and 2 more attack, rather than, well, being an in-between the other forms. Also, Thrash was also a meh thing to have versus Accelerock, so, Rock-type Thrash would be on point anyway.

My thoughts are complicated here.
First off, hate what they did with Midnight form. I just don't think it being a "counter" Pokemon works for it. The werewolf concept is interesting but they don't do anything with it. They should have completely gutted its Speed and put that in Attack and let it be a tank (so in the very least could be useful on a Trick Room team).
As for it getting a Signature Move, I say instead give it a Signature Ability. Maybe a special Rock-type version of Technician which doubles the Power of Rock-type Moves 60 Power of lower, Heart of Stone (or Stone Heart). THAT WAY, they can give Dusk form both Accelerock and Heart of Stone to give it a 80 Power Priority Move (and Rock Tomb will be a 120 Power Move which lowers Speed).
Speaking of which, I think it's fine Dusk's stats lean more toward Midday, though I think they could have put more Speed into Attack.

I just dislike the concept of regional-only evolutions. Base Farfetch'd and Corsola could have worked with direct evolutions, Qwilfish did not need to have a recolor of a regional form, Sneasel could had worked fine with a split evolution... Also, Kleavor as an in-between Scyther and Scizor would IMO have worked the best. Rock armor and weaponry aren't as good as Steel ones, but also don't weight it down as much.

There are two I agree with:

Farfetch'd: Suddenly the small leek it's holding becomes a giant lance and has enough husk to form a shield? I guess it wouldn't be that farfetched, but I also think it works better with a regional variant whose leek is already big, so big infact that it lost the ability to fly so put more focus into fighting thus becoming Fighting-type (and upon learning to master fighting with the leek is able to transform it into a stronger weapon and use leftover parts of it). It could also be a reflection on Farfetch'd's origins, an idiom meaning being a sucker; poor normal Farfetch'd can't improve because it'll otherwise go against the idiom.
Corsola: I would agree it didn't need it... though that's also a pretty sad fate to give to all Corsola which is probably why it got a Regional Variant instead. I would still like normal Corsola to get an evolution, but maybe not one so depressing. I always thought a cool evo for it would be it combining with a sea anemone.

As for Kleavor, I'm fine with how it is. Sure, steel is harder than rock, BUT Kleavor's rocks are in a shape of an axe while Scizor's are in a shape of pincer claw. The pincer is made of metal, but I'm pretty sure the stone axe is gonna hurt a LOT more.

also, are you guys really Ok with the human's designs in S&V? cause the eyes are just so damn ugly to me

Ever since they showed off the player characters I've felt the eyes were off.

I think the execution stinks, but I like the concept Let's Go had of setting requirements before going into the gym.

Eh, that's what the Gym Puzzle is for (or Gym Test in SV). I think they only added it in Let's Go because there's no Wild Pokemon battles so they wanted to make sure your Pokemon were ready for the Gym Levels.

 

[Coronis]

I haven’t actually gone back and even rematched the E4 (idk if you can aha) but I actually liked the return to an ordered Elite Four in SV, like back in Gen 1-4. Could just be me though. (was also kinda sad they weren’t in Academy Ace tournament (aside from Hassell). Hopefully in the DLC we get something more involving Gym Leaders/E4/maybe even Team Star Leaders

 

[ScraftyIsTheBest]

I haven’t actually gone back and even rematched the E4 (idk if you can aha)

From what I've heard you can't. The Champion Assessment in SV is a one and done thing.

And since Hassel is the only one who shows up in the Academy Ace Tournament, the other three cannot be rematched again. Well except Larry, who you can rematch one more time except he returns to his Gym Leader type.

 

[Pikachu315111]

Hopefully in the DLC we get something more involving Gym Leaders/E4/maybe even Team Star Leaders

I'd be surprised and disappointed if they didn't. While SwSh had you able to rematch the Gym Leaders in the base game already, they did later on add in the Galarian Star Tournament which was fun. I know GF is adverse to using good ideas again, though I hope maybe them leaving out E4 Rematches (and Gym Leaders rematches) would mean they're planning something like it to go along with the DLCs.

Yes, I said, "go along with the DLCs". Not PART of the DLC, along with. For free to everyone. GF, you for some reason want more time or wait to have the League rematches, fine I guess, I guess it gives another reason for players to come back to the games. But don't you DARE put basic rematches as part of the paid DLC. You want to have something like a Paldean Star Tournament part of the DLC? Fine, go right ahead, that's technically an additional feature which would hopefully also come along with some unique stuff such as additional rewards and interactions between characters. But there should be no reason why a player can't go to the Gym (Building) or the Pokemon League and ask to challenge the Gym Leader/Elite Four again but this time at higher levels.

Oddly the Team Flare bosses you can fight again (once a day, but don't think you'd want to do more than that). You can't rematch their Starmobiles though. And of course the Titans are one-and-done.

If it were up to me, alongside Teal Mask I'd have an free DLC which lets you re-challenge the bosses of each of the three Treasure Hunt storylines: League (Gym Leaders, Elite Four, Geeta, & Nemona), Team Star (the Starmobile battles & Penny), and the Titans (also able to battle Arven too). Nothing too special, just able to re-experience those battles but at higher Levels.

Then, for the Indigo Disk, since it's about you visiting another Academy, I can see them using that to do a Paldean Star League thing. Teal Mask had the basic rematches alongside it, now it's time to do some more ambitious things. Maybe add in more Titans (actually they could probably do this in the Teal Mask too, there was only 5 Types covered by the Titans leaving 13 available), and give Penny a Starmobile.

 

[QuentinQuonce]

I haven’t actually gone back and even rematched the E4 (idk if you can aha) but I actually liked the return to an ordered Elite Four in SV, like back in Gen 1-4. Could just be me though.

I like both approaches, but the ordered E4 feels more natural to me in part because they generally imply the order is due to them being ranked in strength. Like, Lance is very clearly the most powerful of the Kanto E4 whereas three years later it's suggested that Will is a very recent addition to their roster, and Bruno has moved up in rank (evidently seniority doesn't default to the longest-serving member, as Karen takes the top spot). In Hoenn, Sidney's youth and relative inexperience are emphasised, and Lucian outright states that he's the most powerful of the Sinnoh group. Rika calling Hassell the "last line of defence" would seem to confirm he's the designated strongest too. The Unova, Kalos, and Alola groups seem to be more "we're all equals here" which makes more sense on the face of it; they're all master trainers and apparently not in direct competition - but with top-level professionals in fields like sports and intellectual pursuits there's usually a constant ranking to say that so-and-so is the #1 athlete/chess player. You'd expect that they'd seek to establish their own internal ranking rather than leaving it as "well we're all just as good as one another".

 

[Coronis]

I like both approaches, but the ordered E4 feels more natural to me in part because they generally imply the order is due to them being ranked in strength. Like, Lance is very clearly the most powerful of the Kanto E4 whereas three years later it's suggested that Will is a very recent addition to their roster, and Bruno has moved up in rank (evidently seniority doesn't default to the longest-serving member, as Karen takes the top spot). In Hoenn, Sidney's youth and relative inexperience are emphasised, and Lucian outright states that he's the most powerful of the Sinnoh group. Rika calling Hassell the "last line of defence" would seem to confirm he's the designated strongest too. The Unova, Kalos, and Alola groups seem to be more "we're all equals here" which makes more sense on the face of it; they're all master trainers and apparently not in direct competition - but with top-level professionals in fields like sports and intellectual pursuits there's usually a constant ranking to say that so-and-so is the #1 athlete/chess player. You'd expect that they'd seek to establish their own internal ranking rather than leaving it as "well we're all just as good as one another".

It definitely makes sense thematically in Alola at least with the League just being formed as to why they’d not have a ranking, less so in the other regions.

 

[Hugin]

An ordered E4 is also good for players who are doing level-limited challenge runs. I generally play with the rule that I try not to outlevel the next boss' ace. In Paldea, I can walk into the E4 matching Rika's 58, and while my team will level up a bit as I go through, I won't outlevel Hassel's 61 unless something weird is going on. Alola, where everything is lvl 54-55, I will definitely overlevel unless I go in at like 53.

 

[Pikachu315111]

I like both approaches, but the ordered E4 feels more natural to me in part because they generally imply the order is due to them being ranked in strength.

It definitely makes sense thematically in Alola at least with the League just being formed as to why they’d not have a ranking, less so in the other regions.

Honestly, aside from the last E4 member, I think generally the positions of first, second, and third are interchangeable. Like, before writing this post I tried going through each one to reason why the Ordered ones are the way they are... but than I realized I could just as easily come up with an explanation if the order of first to third were different. It makes me more wonder if an Ordered E4 is moreso to emphasized the strength of the last member or possibly a representation of the Region.

 

[QuentinQuonce]

Also, Kleavor as an in-between Scyther and Scizor would IMO have worked the best.

Been thinking about this since I saw it the other day. I don't think we've ever had a new evolution that worked like this but imo it'd be really cool to see, conceptually and mechanically. The middle stage could just be skipped entirely, with Scyther who become Kleavor having access to moves (and even perhaps abilities?) that Scizor who evolve directly from Scyther do not. It already works like this with babies, there's scope to do something similar with a middle evolution.

 

[pika pal]

I like both approaches, but the ordered E4 feels more natural to me in part because they generally imply the order is due to them being ranked in strength. Like, Lance is very clearly the most powerful of the Kanto E4 whereas three years later it's suggested that Will is a very recent addition to their roster, and Bruno has moved up in rank (evidently seniority doesn't default to the longest-serving member, as Karen takes the top spot). In Hoenn, Sidney's youth and relative inexperience are emphasised, and Lucian outright states that he's the most powerful of the Sinnoh group. Rika calling Hassell the "last line of defence" would seem to confirm he's the designated strongest too. The Unova, Kalos, and Alola groups seem to be more "we're all equals here" which makes more sense on the face of it; they're all master trainers and apparently not in direct competition - but with top-level professionals in fields like sports and intellectual pursuits there's usually a constant ranking to say that so-and-so is the #1 athlete/chess player. You'd expect that they'd seek to establish their own internal ranking rather than leaving it as "well we're all just as good as one another".

On the athlete comparison, I guess it's tricky if the Pokemon aren't in wholly comparable categories. Like every Soccer/Football player is playing the same game (even if different positions they're usually compared against other people playing what they do) and people are often experts in a particular field or category of knowledge.

With Pokemon, how do you verify when a trainer is your better outside of gamey stuff like levels or explicit lore (Lance with Dragons which are supposed to be very hard to train in Gen 1 depiction)? With Unova, how would one define Grimsley as better than Shauntal or Caitlyn as opposed to similar/equals where one happens to specialize in a better match-up? It can work in reverse for older E4's like Koga and Bruno being better than the Psychic Specialist Will (the anime does this a bit with the "all equal" Kalos setup of Drasna intimidating Wikstrom despite her Dragons being disadvantaged against Steel), but I feel like they haven't really wanted to suggest a "power scale" to the Elite Four after Gen 1 where a big part of it was Lance faking you out as the fake final boss before Blue's reveal.

 

[QuentinQuonce]

On the athlete comparison, I guess it's tricky if the Pokemon aren't in wholly comparable categories. Like every Soccer/Football player is playing the same game (even if different positions they're usually compared against other people playing what they do) and people are often experts in a particular field or category of knowledge.

With Pokemon, how do you verify when a trainer is your better outside of gamey stuff like levels or explicit lore (Lance with Dragons which are supposed to be very hard to train in Gen 1 depiction)? With Unova, how would one define Grimsley as better than Shauntal or Caitlyn as opposed to similar/equals where one happens to specialize in a better match-up? It can work in reverse for older E4's like Koga and Bruno being better than the Psychic Specialist Will (the anime does this a bit with the "all equal" Kalos setup of Drasna intimidating Wikstrom despite her Dragons being disadvantaged against Steel), but I feel like they haven't really wanted to suggest a "power scale" to the Elite Four after Gen 1 where a big part of it was Lance faking you out as the fake final boss before Blue's reveal.

I always figured it was purely down to training. The Elite Four presumably constantly train against each other as well as the Champion (in the Gen IV anime we see this several times); Lorelei presumably hasn't ever beaten Bruno (or at the very least loses to him much more often than she wins).
In FRLG there's a Black Belt in Indigo Plateau who complains that he can't beat Agatha, suggesting that he's capable of beating Lorelei and Bruno. It obviously makes sense for a Fighting trainer to be able to defeat Lorelei with relative ease, and perhaps he and Bruno are more or less easily matched. But this points to Agatha being a level above the others.

Though I would think at a high enough level type specialisms hardly matter at all in most cases; Caitlin is probably quite equally matched against Grimsley and Shauntal and isn't at an immediate disadvantage because of her chosen type. So Lorelei being weaker than Bruno and Agatha is probably more about her experience/skill than anything else - it's a case of "you're not bad, I'm just better". Or to put it another way, she's a 9.5, he's a 9.6.